cybernationsfandomcom-20200215-history
The Conference of Novorograd
Ranather's Speech "Ladies and Gentleman. Esteemed guests. Welcome. Not many can say they hosted a conference days after an inch from death. Death. Destruction. The aftereffects of the main cause for this conference. Terrorism. In one way or another, most of us here have been touched by it in some way. From car bombings and riots, to assassination attempts, to in a few cases, outright revolution. We've come together today, because we the civilized nations of Digiterra, have said, enough! We will not let thugs harass our people, destroy our homes, threaten our freedom. A new age of cooperation and understanding amongst the civilized peoples can bring an end to this menace. Our weapons? Education, knowledge, preparedness, and a common understanding that these actions will not be tolerated. That if any group or rouge nation incites terrorist acts, they shall be met with due force. Together, we can make this world just a little safer in these uncertain and troublesome times." Session One *'Response from Phoenix Empire': And mercy if I might add it has proven a good weapon against OZ the way to stop terrorism isn't to execute the terrorists but to show their supporters they are wrong in all else I agree. *'Response from the Chair': "The representative from Phoenicia makes a due point. Sometimes these thugs seek to make martyrs of themselves. These situations must be dealt with the greatest of care, as one does not want to vindicate the terrorist by appearing to be no better than they themselves are. *'Response from lgtromm': Most terrorist cells seem to be of the domestic nature. Domestic terrorism has roots in economic and social discontent. Often, victims of war, poverty, and heinous crimes turn to terrorism in an attempt to give meaning to their distraught lives. Combating poverty and social inequality is a major internal initiative within lgtromm. I would suggest that education and social initiatives are utilized to combat possible terrorist cells. Social initiatives need not be supported by the government. Through education and nurturing a culture that promotes helping the impoverished and the downtrodden, we can help prevent some of the major causes of terrorism. A suicide bomber does not wake up one day, and decide, "I am going to blow myself up for the hell of it." They are deceived by those who take advantage of the less fortunate and exploit these troubled peoples' issues for his or her own personal gain. These leeches must be stopped. They are exacerbate and already tense situation and that is unacceptable, because the only entity who benefits from the exploitation of these people is the terrorist ring leaders. The solutions are dependent on the geopolitical circumstances engulfing each nation. With that in mind, we must all be proactive in enacting solutions that prevent radical cells from gaining a large infrastructure from which they can launch attacks unhinged. To do that, will require international cooperation in weeding out current cells, and preventing cells from arisinging from within a nation's own borders. *'Response to Phoenicia from Promised Land': Indeed, I've heard a saying once, that the best way to fight an idea is with another idea. Yes, we do fight the violent extremists to prevent unnecessary deaths, but we can also show some of them the error of their ways, and erode any convictions they may have. *'Response from the Welsh Empire': Thank You. As you may know, The Welsh Empire has been plagued by terrorist cells for the last few years, "The Kingdom of England and Espana to name just 2. We'd love to see a global anti terror force. So when a nation calls upon it, it can be dispensed to them. We'd certainly be willing to put a few million pounds into it and also a few thousand men. *'Response from USNA': When you say this do you mean an alliance against terrorism with conventional forces or more of a multi-national special forces operation? *'Response from the Welsh Empire to USNA': Those nations that participate and put money/troops into the 'Force' would be able to call upon it to eliminate any terrorist cells WHITHIN their nation. We could have a congress and inspectors to ensure the force was only ever used for good. It'd not be an alliance, if you decided to attack another nation, this force wouldn't be able to be called upon. *'Response from Promised Land to Welsh Empire': So, basically, you are proposing a purely international force for the express purpose of combatting terrorism and violent insurgencies? Would such a force be taken from the participating nations' armies, or special forces? *'Statement from Tanis': As Mr. Yanukovych has stated, large-scale global terrorism is rare and is mainly domestic. We agree that one of the many tools to combat terrorism is to offer better social, educational, and economic situations to the poverty-stricken. While domestic terrorism can be solved with domestic solutions usually, global terrorism is another issue. These groups have agendas, the will and sometimes the financial backing to facilitate such destruction. We support the move to establish making a global anti-terror force. But we must also be pro-active in preventing such attacks and that will need increased international cooperation and intelligence sharing, of course such intelligence sharing is subjective. *'Response from Welsh Empire to Promised Land': That could be discussed. It can be whatever we want it to be essentially. What we propose however is that each nation provides 2,000 troops. These could be soldiers from within their own army or just 2,000 newly trained personnel. They'd be handed over To "The Anti-Terrorism congress" (each nation would have 2 representatives) then they'd be trained to be great at hunting down terrorists. Then if a member nation needed to, it could apply for assistance from the Congress, the members would vote and if it was a yes. The congress would deploy the special forces to eradicate the threat. Obviously if people aren't ahppy with this we could change certain areas of it. Session Two *'Statement from Phoenicia': In stead of a force I would rather propose increased Intelligence and Financial sharing. Establishing a fund from which Nations victim of terrorism can withdraw money from or cooperation as said Military Force can be done perfectly well by the nation. Generally it isn't the lack of manpower to stop terrorism but the lack of adequate funds and information. *'Response from Tanis to Welsh Empire': Minister Long, while having an anti-terror force is a great idea and all, its only good after a "Terrorist Attack" has occurred. The delegate from the Phoenix Empire has also some great ideas. Increasing our secondary-strike capabilities is good and all, the terrorists still have first-strike advantage. Isn't the prevention of terrorist attacks our number one priority? Increasing our intelligence and financial capabilities is necessary, as well, as I have stated, increased cooperation in sharing our intelligence to any nation that is threatened. *'Response from Phoenicia to Tanis': Exactly we need to fight terrorism before it gets a chance to hurt people. That can be done by for example a Universal database of dangerous people and allowing our Intelligence agencies to suspend certain Civil Rights in name of National Security. *'Statement from Hurontario': Terrorism is a vaguely define term, and it seems to me that the major powers will abuse it to their own ends. Using terror as a weapon is wrong, but it seems that for other leaders they consider it wrong only if it is done by the opposite side. *'Response from Tanis to Hurontario': While, we are a new nation and we haven't suffered a terrorist attack, the recent string of them concerns us. Sure, terrorism is a loosely defined word that is subjective. But let me show you the dictionary definitions of Terrorism: *1. The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. *2. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. *3. A terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. Let me point to the third definition, terrorism can be used by sovereign states or by common people to resist government. Generalizing terrorism is indeed a step in faulty logic, why terrorism exists in a county should be examined on a case by case basis. We cannot always justify government-sponsored terrorism as well as non-governmental forms of terrorism. *'Statement from UDCR': Gentlemen, we have come here to solve a global crisis, that of people wanting to blow themselves up or shoot something for reasons of faith, or because they really believe something. I'm going to be the first to say it. This meeting is utterly pointless. There is nothing we can do to combat this short of drugging every baby that shows up in your nation. Fact is, you can't stop someone from doing what they believe in. Then, you try to help them out by doing what they want, and someone else gets pissed at ya. It's a simple fact that this can't be stopped. I will say, however, that one way we could slow it down is perhaps by making nations freer. Give the people more to talk about, open up your government to transparency. Let the people know what is going on. There'll still be someone out there who'll say I hate the Jews/Muslims/Christians/Conservatives/Liberals/Blacks/Asians/Whites/whoever the hell else and go after em. Kill a few, probably. There's nothing you can do about it. Sorry to say this, but you can't fight someone who does guerrilla warfare effectively. Just not done. *'Response from the Welsh Empire to UDCR': If we do nothing, then we will fail. I am up for trying though. My people have suffered too much for me not to. *'Response from UDCR to Welsh Empire': We can try. But what can we do? Session Three *'Statement from Promised Land': All of you have good points. I still think a quick-reaction force to combat those terrorist actions we cannot prevent is a good thing. However, as another delegate pointed out, we need to actively try and prevent thse things as well. The intelligence sharing and common fund are both good ideas, as well as educational programs to try and moderate the opinions of those who would use terrorist attacks. Second, any terrorist actions in Promised Land cannot be attributed to lack of free-thinking. We do not oppose ANY form of idea as long as it does not violate any of the laws we have in place to protect the safety and rights of all our citizens. This meeting is not pointless, because there IS a way to fight geurillas--either win them over, or raise the population's awareness, and turn the populace against them. *'Statement from USNA': Both sides on this matter have definite merit. Regarding an combat force to be used against terrorism we believe that smaller special forces units should be used against them as if it is an isolated incident they should be able to respond faster and more effciently than a brigade of regular troops. Regarding the prevention of terrorism. We obviously believe that it is best to try prevent it but sometimes the root cause of terrorism cannot be changed. In my nation we have communist and nationalist separatists attempting to take one of our major cities through force. Why? Because their party leaders were convicted of a crime and when sentenced like any other criminals they respond with terrorism and attempted revolution. We see many terrorist groups merely as an attempt to seize power. Most of the nations victimized by terrorism over recent time have some sort of democratic or representative form of government in place. There is no need for people to resort to terrorism most of the time in my opinion. *'Statement from Hurontario': In my nation there is a good minority, although not to big of a native people called the Huron, which the lake which my nation was partially named after was named after. There is little friction between them and the European majority, due to the fact that we have given them full language rights, infact their language after English is the second official language, also we respect and are currently helping them to recover their culture. Perhaps respecting the natives of an area is the key to preventing 'terrorism', a respected people have few good reasons to attack. *'Response from Promised Land to Hurontario': We certainly have no trouble from the natives where I'm from. The Aborigines were given full citizenship rights, as well as have places set aside, should they so choose to take the opportunity, where they can practice and keep their ancient traditions. *'Statement from Arctica': It was, Emperor, thank you. Congratulations on your recovery. *'Statement from Promised Land': Everyone, I want you to meet someone...the man our nation simply knows by the code-name, Subtleknifewielder. He'll be listening in on, and possibly even contributing to, our discussions. *'Response from the Chair': Excellent. Welcome to the two of you. *'Response from Promised Land to the Chair': Subtleknifewielder - Thank you for the welcome, As my diplomat said, I will mostly be observing, but I will add some comments if I deem it necessary. *'Statement from Ubersteinia': Gentlemen, gentlemen, you think too much like nation leader. You wish win this war on terror you speak about, you must think like terrorist! Call me crude, I do not see terrorists as thugs. Much work for successfull terror plan, much work needed to fight plan. Killing terrorists spreads cause of terrorist, hate grows when bullets used. In my homeland Ubersteinia, rarely we fight terror with bullets. You have saying, yes? Pen is stronger than sword? It's true against terrorists. No bullets will win. Session Four *'Statement from the Republic': I agree with, erm, Ubie over there," she said, calling him Ubie for lack of a better term. "There's a lot we can do to help them instead of killing them. My own country took force in dealing with domestic terrorists, and it ended up boiling over into a full-fledged civil war. The way to end the war was to kill our own people in the name of safety, and it is something we will have to live with for the rest of our lives. We could have ended it by more peaceful means and broadening ourselves and our ideals - instead we resorted to force and it cost us in blood. *'Response from Promised Land to Ubersteinia': That's what some of us already do, Mr...whoever you are, I refer to an earlier statement of mine. 'The Best way to fight an idea is with another idea.' However, we cannot simply stand back and let the terrorists kill innocent bystanders while we try to show them the error of their ways. *'Statement from Ubersteinia': Jaa-ääni. Word alone not good, but is main thrust. Best way is inful...kirota...ah! Infiltrate, yes, infiltrate ranks of terrorist, make infighting. Terrorists are smart, yet petty and violent. They kill selves soon enough after seed planted. For name, you call me Dr. Komeilu. *'Response from the Republic to Promised Land': Mr. Jameson, the point is to make sure nobody has to die. *'Response from Promised Land': That is another reason you see little to no terrorist activity in my nation, Subtleknifewielder added. By promoting mistrust and divisions within them, I make sure no organization remains cohesive enough to be a threat. Exactly, Jameson said. But sometimes we cannot achieve our goals, Princess Juli, no matter how much we try. The saying goes, 'Hope for the best, plan for the worst. *'Statement from Byzantium': You do have a point there. She nodded to Princess Juli. But, in my country, we view terrorists as terrorists, simply as that. Because they are willing to inflict harm out of malicious intent, they are unwilling to repent and to reform their ways. As much as I hate to admit that, we do use quite a bit force when dealing with terrorists, to show that every action has a consequences, so to say. If we tried to negiotate or otherwise to try to help them, they might take it as a sign of weakness and use it to further harm us. We cannot allow that. *'Response from Ubersteinia to Byzantium': Tell me, you have death sentance in you're country? No nation with death sentance claim innocence without being..how you say... hypocrites? Each death another martyr. *'Statement from Tanis': The UOIIO agent is right. All this talk of having an anti-terror special forces unit isn't the solution to the problem. The use of terrorism is usually a option of last resort. Most of the time, people depending on their "cause" or "ideology", will spread like wildfire regardless if one thinks you've killed the head. Retaliation breeds more terror, not less. It may seems like a nation has reduced their terror threat since they "crushed" a terror network, but it means that terrorist organizations are rethinking to make a better plot. We cannot offer a 'one tool' to fix it all, its simply impossible and it disregards political, social and economic situations. Like a doctor, we have symptoms and we have root causes of a diseases. It's better that we figure out those causes. Eliminating terrorist manpower is impossible and will lead to civil war, if it stoops that low. Session Five *'Response from Promised Land': We, nor they, I assume, are not claiming innocence. However, those of us who use Capital Punishment only use it for the worst of crimes--treason, mass murder, and the like. Hence the use of subtlety, as our 'friend' from Ubersteinia pointed out... *'Response from Byzantium to Ubersteinia': Yes, we do have the death penalty in our country. However, we only use it for serious crimes and that includes terrorism. *'Response from Ubersteinia to Byzantium': You break rule then, you kill them with state, not with themselves. People make them martyrs. You think I not know how people think? My job is look and hear people 24/7. I know how people think. *'Statement from the Republic': The death penalty will not make terrorists afraid. They will, as, um, Ubie has pointed out, w-will see themselves as martyrs. They will fight and they will die for their cause.. and the point is to not let them die for their cause, it is to make sure they don't have a cause to fight for. *'Statement from Arctica': I know metaphors aren't perfect, but for the ease of explanation, I'll use one. Terrorism is like a fire. Many things can be used as fuel, and it will use anything that is nearby, spreading itself and destabilizing the things it touches...and making things close enough to the flame quite uncomfortable. There are different ways to deal with it. You can grab a sheet of metal and beat the flames with it. All this does is make it move around more erratically, spreading hot pieces of fuel and the fire itself everywhere. You can cut off its oxygen supply - in the case of terrorism, controlling the words and thoughts of people - and extinguish it. No matter the amount of fuel, it won't start again. Or you can do what firemen do: throw water onto the source of the fire; the fuel will become useless. This is parallel to solving the underlying problems. However, this is only possible when the people are against you. If the problem is not with the population, and - as I assume the focus of this conference is - with groups of foreign groups conducting 'terrorist attacks', then the solution is to grab it with a gloved hand and crush it. This way the fuel is too damaged to use and the fire itself is scattered. My government sees this as parallel to forcefully dissolving a terrorist group. I've seen that, before I arrived, there were discussions of starting a special forces group to combat terrorists. Just to be clear, my government does not define 'special forces' as simply being elite soldiers; we have the Herons for that, or at least used to. But I'm getting off the subject. We should discuss the possible efficiency of such a group. What exactly can an international coalition of these 'special operatives' accomplish that our own respective intelligence agencies and related services cannot? *'Statement from Ustio': Sorry I'm late, I hope I didn't miss too much. But I did overhear your statement sir, and I must say that you are right about terrorists, that they are matyrs who would die for their cause. Sometimes their cause makes them popular with a certain group but like military operations, they become unpopular when the goal isn't achieved quickly. Then the group starts to weaken and lose support. You see, time maybe our enemy, but in the case of terrorism, especially the case with organized terror groups, time and perseverance, my friends, are our greatest weapons, and we must use those weapons to finally force them to give up their goals. Category:FranzhariaCategory:Roleplay